Lib College Employee Threatens Pro-Life Man With The Unthinkable- Many Want Him Fired

A staff member at Purdue University allegedly threatened to rape the family of a pro-life supporter in response to a campaign a student group ran on campus last week to raise awareness about the high abortion rate in African American community.

Last week, the Purdue Students for Life put up flyers and chalked messages around campus meant to raise awareness about the problem.

Jamie Newman, an employee for the university who works in the Visual and Performing Arts Department, commented on a blog post by the Students for Life group explaining the purpose of their campaign. “You folks are vile, racist idiots, who richly deserve all the opprobrium that will be heaped on you as a result of this unbelievably thoughtless, stupid escapade,” Newman wrote.  

He added, “And that you should have pulled this stunt at the beginning of Black History Month suggests you are either epically clueless or profoundly malicious. So, which is [it] — embarrassingly dumb or simply evil.”

Not content to vent his anger at the pro-life students on the college blog, Newman threatened rape against a pro-life supporter while commenting on a Live Action News blog post. Responding to a comment by someone named Tom, Newman wrote:

Oh, I’m sorry. So, let me make my intentions quite explicit: I did in fact offer to rape Tom’s wife/daughter/great grandmother. Free of charge, even. I’m generous that way. Here’s the number for the West Lafayette Police Department: 765-775-5500. Here’s the number for the local FBI office: 765-435-5619. Drop that dime! I could strike at any minute. *giggles* (like a girl).

Image Credit: Student for Life

Image Credit: Student for Life

In a statement obtained by Campus Reform, Purdue University said it is investigating the comments left by “jamiegnewman.”

“Obviously, a threat of rape is outside the bounds of any definition of protected speech. Due process requires that, before taking any action, we verify the alleged facts and give this staff member the chance to explain himself if he can,” Assistant Vice President for Strategic Communications Julie Rosa told Campus Reform. “Needless to say, the statements, as alleged, are reprehensible and unacceptable in the eyes of the entire Purdue community.”

The Purdue Students for Life published an open letter to the campus community on Thursday defending the overall purpose of their campaign, while also apologizing for co-oping language from the Black Lives Matter movement. Regarding the targeting of African Americans for abortion, the group wrote:

This is not a matter of political opinion — it’s simply about numbers. Abortion rates for African-Americans are up to five times higher than those of the white population. In New York City, for instance, black children are more likely to be aborted than to be born — for every 1000 births, 1180 children are aborted (source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene).

This happens in part because black communities are being targeted by the abortion industry and propagandized to believe that the preborn are subhuman. They are taught that abortion centers such as Planned Parenthood are the only source of reproductive healthcare, and are not offered the support they need to parent. This routine of systematic misinformation is worthy of being brought to the attention of our academic environment.

h/t: Conservative Review 

Sorry, Bernie: Tuition Free ≠ Debt Free

With the 2016 New Hampshire Democratic Primary just around the corner and scores of college-aged voters up for grabs, affordable public college education has become a key selling point for Bernie Sanders. The Sanders plan to “Make College Tuition-Free and Debt-Free proposes offering free tuition at public colleges and universities, lowering interest rates on current and future student loans, meeting 100 percent of low-income students’ financial needs, and tripling the federal work-study program. As with most government handouts, the Sanders plan will likely cost more and deliver less than it promises.

Let’s start with the cost estimates for free public higher education. Virtually every advocate of free tuition references an article in The Atlantic from January 2014, which estimates the cost at roughly $62.6 billion. Sanders, factoring in his additional proposals, predicts closer to $75 billion. Two-thirds of his plan would be federally funded via new taxes on Wall Street speculators, with states contributing the remainder.

The problem with these calculations is that they are based on static projections for tuition costs. If this assumption proves faulty, the actual cost of implementing the Sanders plan will balloon. And there are three good reasons to expect an increase in tuition costs.

First, history suggests that tuition will continue to rise. Tuition rates have been gradually increasing over past decades, with students now paying 3.22 times more than in 1985 [See Figure 6, p. 18]. The Sanders plan will likely exasperate this trend because it will remove any incentive for public institutions to slow these increases.

Second, any reduction in current sources of revenue would likely require increases in tuition rates to cover the shortfall. For example, a large portion of public college budgets are governmentally funded through grants, tax benefits, and work-study programs. In 2014, state aid and local taxes cumulatively contributed $81.6 billion in these areas. Cuts to state or local budgets could result in less revenue for public colleges and universities, which would have to be offset by higher tuition rates.

Most public institutions also depend on revenue from hospitals, auxiliary enterprises, private gifts, investment income, and other educational activities. These sources contributed $80 billion—or one-third of total revenue—to public institutions (four-year, two-year, and less than two-year) in 2012. Although these programs are generally self-sustaining, the amount of revenue they generate is not guaranteed. Unexpected revenue deficits in these areas could also result in tuition hikes, costs ultimately saddled onto the taxpayer under the Sanders plan.

Third, the advent of free tuition will provide a powerful incentive for students to enroll in public colleges and universities. Whether motivating those who never before considered college to finally enroll, or incentivizing private college students to switch to the public sector, or a combination of both, the result will be the same—a significant increase in the cost of offering free tuition, well above estimates based on static enrollments in public institutions.

As faulty as Sander’ cost estimates appear, perhaps the more troubling aspect of his plan is its false promise of eliminating student loan debt. The cost of college attendance includes far more than just tuition. In fact, fully half of public college students’ expenditures remains room and board. The College Board reports the average published tuition rate for public four-year in-state students as $9,410, while the corresponding price of room and board is $10,138. Textbooks are another significant cost of attendance, with the average public undergraduate student paying $1,200 annually.

Admittedly, many public institution students attend a community college or commute, which minimizes room and board costs but does not eliminate them entirely. If only tuition is covered by government, students will still require loans to pay for their textbooks, room, and board, and many will remain weighed down with debt. While promising to provide a post-secondary panacea, Sanders merely increases government spending without lifting students’ financial burdens.

Before enacting a new federal entitlement, the American people deserve a more careful accounting of its costs. As currently written, the price tag of the Sanders plan is simply not as affordable as its proponents claim. College-aged voters would do well to look past the tirades against Wall Street speculators and demand more details—details such as exactly what services will be “free,” meticulous analysis of the plan’s financial assumptions, and specifics regarding how unexpected costs will be funded. They might be surprised to learn that the so-called free lunch they are being offered costs far more than suggested—and it doesn’t really taste that good, either.

– See more at: http://www.visionandvalues.org

Lib Professor Who Called For ‘Muscle’ To Remove Media Just Got Massive Justice Delivered

In the wake of disruptive college demonstrations that spread across the nation throughout last year, a conversation about race relations in the U.S. followed — along with criticism of the tactics used by student and faculty protesters. One of the most pilloried figures involved in the trend-setting protest at the University of Missouri was Melissa Click.

Employed as a communications professor at the school, Click was caught on camera forcing a campus reporter to leave a protest in progress after insisting that he had no right to report on the public event. She then asked around for “some muscle” to aid her in the task of forcibly removing the reporter from the premises.

The negative attention was not relegated to social media or the largely right-leaning outlets already critical of the associated Black Lives Matter movement. Recent reports indicate Click has been charged with a misdemeanor assault in connection to the on-campus incident.

Her current predicament garnered little sympathy among many social media users.

Some suggested the student journalist at the receiving end of Click’s rant should follow up with a civil suit against her.

The class-C crime carries a possible jail sentence of 15 days. Despite the legal action, reports indicate Click remains, as of the latest evidence available, an active member of the university’s faculty.

Her behavior was previously denounced by others, including dozens of state lawmakers who urged the University of Missouri to fire the assistant professor.

Franklin Graham Hears Professor Say Christians And Muslims Worship Same God, Can’t Hold Back Any Longer…

Franklin Graham has weighed in on a controversy at a celebrated evangelical Christian university, where a professor claims that Christians and Muslims pray to the same God.

Dr. Larycia Hawkins, a political science professor at Wheaton College (the “evangelical Harvard”), faces dismissal after she started wearing a Muslim hijab and asserting that Christians, Muslims and Jews worship the same God.

“I stand in religious solidarity with Muslims because they, like me, a Christian, are people of the book,” she wrote in a Dec. 10 Facebook post. “And as Pope Francis stated last week, we worship the same God.”

Following reports last week that the Wheaton Faculty Council voted unanimously to retain Hawkins, Franklin Graham wrote a Facebook post expressing his disappointment with the university:

Both my father Billy Graham and my mother attended Wheaton College in Illinois–in fact that’s where they met. I’m surprised and disappointed that the faculty council there is now recommending the college drop their plans to terminate a professor who published that she believed Islam and Christianity worship the same God in December.

Islam denies that God has a Son. They deny that Jesus is God. They do not believe in a Triune God–the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I can tell you–Islam and Christianity clearly do not worship the same God. How the faculty council can now support this professor being allowed to teach students is deeply concerning.

While the Christian scripture contains the Torah and other Jewish holy writings in what is called the Old Testament, which primarily records God’s dealing with the Jewish’s people, it does not contain any writings of the Koran. The latter consists of the teachings of Muhammad, which he claimed were revelations directly from Allah. Muhammad lived approximately 600 years after Christ.

Jesus, who ministered mainly among the Jewish people and then sent his disciples to the world, made a claim of exclusivity saying, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father, except through me.”

The final determination of Professor Hawkins’ fate has not been made. “The next step in this process is a hearing before the Faculty Personnel Committee [on Feb. 11]. The Faculty Personnel Committee will receive presentations from the Provost and Dr. Hawkins regarding the substantive and procedural issues each would like to raise, will review the evidence presented, and will make a formal recommendation regarding the termination of tenure,” a statement from the university read.

“The Faculty Personnel Committee’s recommendation will then be taken into consideration by President Ryken, as he makes his recommendation to the Board of Trustees.”

Both my father Billy Graham and my mother attended Wheaton College in Illinois–in fact that’s where they met. I’m…

Posted by Franklin Graham on Saturday, January 23, 2016

The Gift Of Ignorance And Sophistry

Another “Holiday Season” is behind us. And every such season, the purge of religion in our public schools just gets worse. In fact, the season now serves to remind us of one thing for certain: the God-purgers are on an unyielding secular crusade that gets more self-righteous ever year.

This past season seemed to reach new levels of absurdity. What we’re seeing now is remarkable not only for its vigorous assault against everything religious, but for the apparent willingness by secularists to embrace ignorance and sophistry in the process. They are willing to make their students—whom they’re supposed to educate—dumb about historical reality and to look downright silly in the process. I’ll illustrate with two examples, starting with this past Thanksgiving, the kick-off of the long “Holiday Season.”

It was fascinating to observe the new tendency by our educators to frame Thanksgiving Day as about anything but giving thanks to God. I detailed this at length a few weeks ago, and will not revisit it fully here, but I checked out the Thanksgiving Day lesson at the website education.com, a go-to source for teachers. On the main page was a lesson plan titled, “Giving Thanks for Thanksgiving.” The lesson did back-flips in a painfully obvious attempt to mention giving thanks to anything but God. There were bountiful references to Native Americans, corn, stuffing, and turkeys, but nothing of the Almighty. The Creator even got trumped by cranberry sauce.

There was nothing in the “lesson” plan about the salient historical fact that the Pilgrims fled religious persecution, that their Thanksgiving feast was about giving thanks to God, and that Presidents Washington and Lincoln—not to mention a long line of White House successors, including the most liberal among them, from Woodrow Wilson to FDR—honored a national day of Thanksgiving for that reason.

This is historical fraud, forgery, perjury. I ask my secular-liberal friends: Is it any wonder why so many people are homeschooling? You can dislike religion, if you prefer. You can even despise it. But a truly “inclusive” education cannot exclude such essential historical facts.

So, what kind of child are these secularists educating? One who will not even learn what the original Thanksgiving was truly about or why our early presidents enacted the day to begin with.

As for Christmas, where do I start to illustrate the madness?

Well, this year the award goes to an elementary school in Kentucky, where the Constitutional geniuses at the Johnson County School District censored from “A Charlie Brown Christmas” the subversive section where Linus recites the Gospel of Luke’s nativity narrative. Sure, the school couldn’t avoid the title “A Charlie Brown Christmas,” but it would not dare tread on any explanation of what “Christmas” is.

The irony here is rich. Consider that Linus’ dialogue is prompted by a question from Charlie Brown, who in exasperation pleads: “Isn’t there anyone who knows what Christmas is all about?” Linus explains, giving an accurate answer from the New Testament. Most ironic, Linus holds forth in front of fellow students in a public-school auditorium.

Like students today, Linus’ friends are free to believe or not believe, but at least they will not be ignorant.

It makes me wonder what this school’s officials would have preferred that the kids watch instead. I have some suggestions for their curriculum next year: How about the old Rankin-Bass productions? “Santa Claus is Coming to Town” has some intriguing stuff about a Winter Warlock. The old guy officiates the first Christmas wedding (so I’m told) in the woods around the North Pole with Mr. and Mrs. Claus. Or, how about “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer?” The kids can take notes wide-eyed as they learn about how Santa and Rudolph swept down and saved Christmas not only for the entire world that year (no Christmas that year otherwise) but even for the poor souls on the Island of Misfit Toys.

Hey, at least Jesus Christ is avoided. That’s the chief goal, right?

In sum, what all of this makes plain is that our secularists prefer not only ignorance over religion for their students, but sophistry.

And why? Because they want to fundamentally transform, to borrow from the signature phrase of our current president. To really fundamentally transform America and the culture, they need to remove as much religion as possible, period.

And when they do, this is the gift of ignorance and sophistry they bestow.

Dr. Paul Kengor is professor of political science and executive director of The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. His latest book is Takedown. His other books include 11 Principles of a Reagan Conservative, The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor and Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century.

Read more at http://www.visionandvalues.org/